This video costs 3 credits to view

Purchasing this video gives you the right to unlimited viewing of this Video on ChessVideos.TV in addition to the ability to download this video in iPod video format for personal viewing. By purchasing this video you agree to the Terms Of Service.

The Matrix? Huh? I don't know man, seems fishy to me. I think you are right in taking on the sharp lines, but it seems that even the simple lines (i.e., non-gambit style) are fine for Black, the question will always be - what the heck is the Q doing on h5?

Still, I like the gambit line you employed. Leads to some interesting play that seems really really good for Black. If someone plays this nonsense against me I'll try the gambit idea - looks like great fun!

you are making me very excited for next week. This one was great, i mean, maybe I've been drinking a little, but this video was just funny. I've always found this opening funny, it initially seems stupid, but then it seems okay when you see white's resources, but then look closer and realize it just doesn't work out well for white at all, no matter if you take the positional, or the tactical approach as black, both ways give black an edge. also lol at the sportsmanship of that guy. I feel sorry for you to have to put up with that lol...

Ugh I'm not looking forward to next week's public humiliation. I hate to be famous as the guy who can't win from the Lucena position! Haha, oh well. Great video though, I'll definitely have to bust out this line against Parham II if I ever cross paths with him again.

I think it's very shortsighted to say that 2. Qh5 is a junk-opening. Your comment about how this is all about white saying that 'he can play anything against black' is just plain wrong. I play it for it's strategical merits after the normal response 2... Nc6. The main thing is that it's very hard for black to play ...d5, which is common in something like the Italian (I play it differently from the one line you showed). Apart from that, I've had quite a few games that followed with a queenside castling by white and a kingside-attack where white could fully exploit the weakened pawn-structure of black which was soly created thanks to 2. Qh5. Another main idea about this opening is to not play any theory, to use one's own creativity from move 2 and not having to follow Grandmaster moves untill move 25. Therefore saying that it's just a junk-opening is just shortsighted.

However, I agree, of course, that 2... Nf6 is probably the refutation of the whole idea. So it's kind of a bluff to play 2. Qh5: if black knows about this move white's going to have a hard time, if black doesn't, white gets some reasonable play.

On another point, I personally do not watch your videos often and actually this is why: what's the point in making a video about how you beat someone that played 2. Qh5? I mean, you're an FM, you have lots of experience, you have even more knowledge about general ideas in chess! But, regretfully imho, you just show interesting, often super-complicated, games, but nothing more. I hope you will not view this as harsh criticism, cause it's not meant that way (it's just not my cup of tea). But as I was going to comment on the content of the video anyway, I thought I would just add that personally I'd think more strategical content (like use of the open-file, bishoppair, outposts etc. etc.) would have been nicer than something about the 2. Qh5 'junk' .

_________________And seeing the beauty of the Dragon-variation, the cosmos re-aligned its stars and immortalised it. For even now, we call that constellation the Dragon constellation.

...But, regretfully imho, you just show interesting, often super-complicated, games, but nothing more. I hope you will not view this as harsh criticism, cause it's not meant that way (it's just not my cup of tea). But as I was going to comment on the content of the video anyway, I thought I would just add that personally I'd think more strategical content (like use of the open-file, bishoppair, outposts etc. etc.) would have been nicer than something about the 2. Qh5 'junk' .

I was of the opinion that Dennis was going to show us his games form the Indiana State Ch, in that sense he brought us this game.

I also think that calling something 'junk' is subjective - I call the French Defense 'junk' when it is obvious that it is not. To be fair to Dennis he did show some lines where White can manage just fine (the Qd3 idea springs to mind).

I thought it was an entertaining and informative view at an unorthodox line of play. The 'Kiddie Counter Gambit', as someone dubbed it, is just how theory develops. Someone comes up with an idea, another person finds the antidote, then the ball is back in White's court. So, after 2. ... Nf6 I wish you luck on finding an improvement for White - this is not meant as a *slight*, I really mean it, I hope there is strong continuation for White. It's just not my cup of tea, so I won't try but if you play this line you might be able to find an improvement.

Pft, Indiana state champ state shmamp! He only plays in Indiana cause he is afraid of us Ohio boys Just kidding, good job winning the title. Maybe someday I can add you to the list of state champions I got lucky and beat in blitz (now stands at 3). I'm playing a 4 round swiss tomorrow against a bunch of higher rated players who are mostly 400 pts or so higher than me, hopefully someone busts out 2. Qh5!? and I can remember more than Just Nf6 and Be7, and actually make a game of it!

_________________facebook: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1023375213 (I guess this is how I link it, anyway you can friend me)

On another point, I personally do not watch your videos often and actually this is why: what's the point in making a video about how you beat someone that played 2. Qh5? I mean, you're an FM, you have lots of experience, you have even more knowledge about general ideas in chess! But, regretfully imho, you just show interesting, often super-complicated, games, but nothing more. I hope you will not view this as harsh criticism, cause it's not meant that way (it's just not my cup of tea). But as I was going to comment on the content of the video anyway, I thought I would just add that personally I'd think more strategical content (like use of the open-file, bishoppair, outposts etc. etc.) would have been nicer than something about the 2. Qh5 'junk' .

I think, or it seems to me, that Mr M. is the type of player that likes, shall we say, "sharp"(?) positions - Sicilians, dynamic positions, etc. So that's going to show up a lot more in the content he does(?) because it seems to me people gravitate towards the type of stuff they like and it would probably be pretty hard to go against the grain on that. I enjoy his game analysis videos and the analysis is very good quality imo but unfortunately for me it's usually "sharp" stuff and rarely dry, positional games (and the same is true about other posters). I'm not sure, though, if it's even desirable for a chess educator to try and be self effacing in the chess he presents... because a) it's probably impossible for most people and b) that personal expression is part of human play and understanding of the game.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum